Rank the Most Important Patriots Players

[Reverend]

You need to read more Zodda, bro. ;-)

Of course, when I asked Zodda how the hell Slater manages to beat a double team like that basically every time, he answered, "Dark magic."

Unlike Pedro, whose singular brilliance on a baseball diamond was easy to see for all - because, that's how God operates, right? - Slater's skills are often hidden, off-screen, by commercial, and because most fans don't give special teams the weight it deserves as a "phase of the game".

And baseball, of course, is also much more linear than football in terms of figuring out a player's output and value. And where does the ease of assessing a player's contribution break down? Precisely where there are interaction effects among players, such as players' overlapping range in the field or the compatibility of pitching style (e.g. GB v. FB) in relation to the fielding.

Credit to Rev for turning this into a learning experience for all of us and broadening the discussion.

Speaking of "dark magic"...

I love Slater, too, and think the casual fan underrates ST generally, but to some extent we can measure "value" in how much much Belichick is willing to pay, and Slater has the 18th-highest cap hit on the team, behind dudes like Branch, Scott Chander, and Cannon. I'm sure (behind closed doors) Belichick and Joe Judge would say Slater's a bargain at twice the price, but I'd guess he's closer to the bottom half of the top 10 than the top (which still makes him underrated by most here).

Bracketing the issue of whether or not Slater is a top three player, I think this is worth unpacking a bit.

Looking at salary the coach (GM) is willing to play is definitely instructive, which is why your player value series is so interesting (I still can't believe more people don't do that kind of work even after The Blind Side.). But Belichick obviously does not set the market himself and we know (Also: The Blind Side) that football has market inefficiencies (only 32 teams will do that) and that scheme and strategy can even create some to be exploited, such as with Belichick's moving to a 3-4 and back depending on what the market demands for different types of players.

So to really gauge total value that Belichick estimates, we'd need to know what Belichick would be willing to pay if pushed more by the market. In this context, it's worth noting that FO at least has the Patriots at #1 in special teams, so there is reason to believe that Belichick values ST more than other HCs and just isn't being pushed as much by market forces, i.e. he might be willing to pay more if forced to.

That said, DVOA is, as we all know, a black box and a lot of that DVOA comes from a certain kicker, so that muddles things some.

 

[ifmanis5]

I feel like Butler should be moving up these lists. Like, way up.

 

[Super Nomario]

Brafocketing the issue of whether or not Slater is a top three player, I think this is worth unpacking a bit.

Looking at salary the coach (GM) is willing to play is definitely instructive, which is why your player value series is so interesting (I still can't believe more people don't do that kind of work even after The Blind Side.). But Belichick obviously does not set the market himself and we know (Also: The Blind Side) that football has market inefficiencies (only 32 teams will do that) and that scheme and strategy can even create some to be exploited, such as with Belichick's moving to a 3-4 and back depending on what the market demands for different types of players.

So to really gauge total value that Belichick estimates, we'd need to know what Belichick would be willing to pay if pushed more by the market. In this context, it's worth noting that FO at least has the Patriots at #1 in special teams, so there is reason to believe that Belichick values ST more than other HCs and just isn't being pushed as much by market forces, i.e. he might be willing to pay more if forced to.

That said, DVOA is, as we all know, a black box and a lot of that DVOA comes from a certain kicker, so that muddles things some.

I'm planning to get into this in my "ST Investment" piece. I've made the case in other threads that Belichick may see excellent special teams players / play as an opportunity for a Moneyball-esque edge (and if anyone thinks this is nonsense, ask yourself how the Pats won yesterday despite being outgained by 16 yards and losing the turnover battle) so I think you're right that Slater (and other top STers) may be underpaid by a market inefficiency. That said, there's so much incentive for winning that I struggle to believe that Slater's value is more than double what he's currently making in terms of salary. That's my intuition, but frankly intuition is all we really have to go on here. I hope to have more concrete data when we resurrect this discussion or a similar one down the line.

(A side point, just because I'm on the topic - one of the difficult points in evaluating how much teams invest in STs is that the top STers by draft value are not picks like Slater and Ebner who were drafted to play STs but guys like Barkevious Mingo and Justin Gilbert who were drafted for O/D roles and are playing special teams because they suck at O/D. If anyone has any ideas on how to distinguish between them, I'm all ears)

 

[IdiotKicker]

Not directly related to the Slater talk is the fact that field position, even a difference as small as 3-6 yards per possession, can play a massive role in determining the outcome of a game. I looked at the final two possessions of the IND/JAX game earlier this year, and it's a really clear example of how having a truly elite player on special teams makes a difference over having someone who is simply good.

 

[JohnnyK]

Slater is the third-longest tenured Patriot player. He has been a team captain for what, the last five seasons? He is often the player who makes locker room speeches, is the player who is sent out to do "tough" media assignments (like the first day of DFG camp), and is (IMO) a future Hall of Famer for his on field play.
Someone up thread used snap counts to dispute Slater's inclusion. That's so ass-backwards it makes my head hurt.
Any list that doesn't include Slater in the top 3 is flat-out-wrong.

Not to beat a dead horse, but as someone who did refer to Slater's snap count as a reason why he should be ranked lower than someone like Hightower I have to say that I took the question as "who can the Pats not lose to injury this year" and purely looked at it from an on-field perspective. If Slater had to go on IR you are not losing his leadership nor locker room presence (see Mayo last year), so now the question boils down to a comparison of Slater's exceptional special teams play with the high level of defensive play of someone like Hightower, and I don't think you can simply ignore snap counts there.

 

[Super Nomario]

And baseball, of course, is also much more linear than football in terms of figuring out a player's output and value. And where does the ease of assessing a player's contribution break down? Precisely where there are interaction effects among players, such as players' overlapping range in the field or the compatibility of pitching style (e.g. GB v. FB) in relation to the fielding.

:: snip ::

So to really gauge total value that Belichick estimates, we'd need to know what Belichick would be willing to pay if pushed more by the market. In this context, it's worth noting that FO at least has the Patriots at #1 in special teams, so there is reason to believe that Belichick values ST more than other HCs and just isn't being pushed as much by market forces, i.e. he might be willing to pay more if forced to.

That said, DVOA is, as we all know, a black box and a lot of that DVOA comes from a certain kicker, so that muddles things some.

Combining these two ideas - the idea of symbiosis for most positions, and the importance of special teams - and in light of the way the Pats won on Sunday, it adds another point of justification for the contract Gostkowski has, and perhaps makes the case for him being higher on these lists. The field goal operation - snap, hold, blocking - is a team operation, but ultimately it can only be successful as Gostkowski can make it. If you go cheap at G, you might be able to help with your C; if you go cheap at WR, you can throw to your TE / RB more; if you go cheap at corner, you can maybe compensate with pass rush. But kicking is close to an absolute; if your kicker can't make a 54-yard field goal, you can't compensate by having an awesome snap-hold operation or blocking for him a little longer.

 

[williams_482]

Combining these two ideas - the idea of symbiosis for most positions, and the importance of special teams - and in light of the way the Pats won on Sunday, it adds another point of justification for the contract Gostkowski has, and perhaps makes the case for him being higher on these lists. The field goal operation - snap, hold, blocking - is a team operation, but ultimately it can only be successful as Gostkowski can make it. If you go cheap at G, you might be able to help with your C; if you go cheap at WR, you can throw to your TE / RB more; if you go cheap at corner, you can maybe compensate with pass rush. But kicking is close to an absolute; if your kicker can't make a 54-yard field goal, you can't compensate by having an awesome snap-hold operation or blocking for him a little longer.

You can partially compensate by making more aggressive choices on 4th down, or turning what you saved on a kicker into improvements in other areas that make critical 54 yard FG tries less likely. Coaches are remarkably reluctant when it comes to the former, and I doubt the extra $2M or so Ghost is being paid could be spent more efficiently elsewhere, but the kicking game isn't (or, perhaps, shouldn't be) as isolated from the rest of the game as it seems.